Bamboleo on 28 March 2010
| famousringo said: Well, I've gotta give you credit. Reading up on these myths has given me something to do while dealing with a very mundane task very late at night. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Puma_Punku Wikipedia, which actually does believe in citation, has some interesting facts: 1. Puma Punku doesn't "defy modern dating techniques." Earliest construction has been dated to sometime in the 5th century AD. 2. Contrary to the true believer talking in the program, the largest blocks at Puma Punku are actually made of sandstone. 3. You don't need diamonds to work diorite. Or if you do, it's not too much of an obstacle for ancient civilizations, since the Code of Hammurabi was inscribed on diorite nearly 3000 years ago: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Code_of_Hammurabi All the same, it's a damned remarkable feat of engineering. It just isn't as impossible as the History Channel wants you to believe it is. This is a case where one particular set of ruins is poorly understood, so various people feel free to fill in the gaps. |
Well, its the first time I take a full read at wikipedia about puma punku, and I just found this forum (http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=162971) which seems to have some serious nerds on the matter discussing the ruins.
Seems that diorite can be worked with any resistant material with the help of quartz......
There's still some confusing questions about this stuff, but I'm singing a different tune...
Only the antikythera mechanism stills amazing me now.
History Channel is full of crap.
